How much force can officers legally use when someone resists arrest or poses a danger to the
public? Officers must often make decisions about whether to use lethal force in rapidly changing
situations in which their own lives or those of bystanders may be at risk.
During a traffic stop, a warrant check revealed that the driver had two outstanding warrants.
According to the officer’s report, the officer who made the stop asked the driver to step outside
the truck and spread his hands against the cab. The driver seemed to comply, but as the officer
reached for his handcuffs, the man tried to grab his own gun. The officer fired two shots. The
driver then ran into the woods. The officer ran after him, firing four more shots during the chase.
According to the officer, the man then stopped running and made another attempt to grab his
own gun. Stating he feared for his life, the officer ended the chase by firing a fatal shot to the
suspect's head.
Let’s review a few concepts before you make a decision about this scene.
For the use of force to be justified, it must be necessary to protect someone from the use of
_______ force or interference by another.
unlawful
excessive
injurious
unnecessary
The courts may rule that officers used excessive force in making an arrest if
the suspect is injured while being taken into custody.
body cameras malfunction or are turned off during an arrest.
the amount of force used is so unreasonable it violates a suspect’s Fourth Amendment rights
officers do not follow the Due Process Clauses of the Constitution before using lethal force.
You are the chief who supervises the officer who fired the fatal shot. According to procedure, the
officer will be placed on administrative leave while an investigation determines whether his use
of lethal force is justified. After the investigation is concluded, you will decide whether the
officer will be fired or continue to serve on your force. At this stage of the investigation, what is
your response?
You advise the officer that his status with the department will depend on whether the forensic
evidence supports his claim that lethal force was necessary to defend himself.
Based on the officer's record and report of the incident, you agree with the officer's judgment that
he had to fire in self-defense.
After the jury reaches a verdict, you must decide whether the officer's actions are consistent with
your department's standards on the use of lethal force.
Let’s review a few more concepts before you make another decision about this scene.
How did the suspect's first attempt to grab a gun change the amount of force the officer could
legally use to effect his arrest?
The officer could use any means necessary to defend himself against a threat to his life.
The officer could reasonably use a Taser on the suspect.
The officer needed to use reasonable force to defend himself.
The officer had a duty to warn the suspect that further resistance might be fatal.
According to the precedent set by Graham v. Connor, in assessing the conduct of this officer,
what test is used to determine whether an officer's use of force is reasonable?
Would a reasonable officer on the scene have made the same decision about the use of force?
Did the officer act to protect members of the public who were in imminent danger?
Did the officer have the duty to retreat?
Did the officer who used lethal force fear for his life?
Once the trial is over, you have two findings to consider: the verdict reached by the jury and the
result of your internal investigation. The question is whether the officer should be allowed to
continue serving as a member of your department. What is your decision?
You fire the officer on the grounds that firing at a suspect who is fleeing the scene violates the
department's standards for use of lethal force.
You allow the officer to keep his job because you agree with the jury that his use of lethal force
was justified.
